Heidt v. Minor
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSharpstein, J.
— The defendants were sureties on the official bond of a notary public by the name of Cordell. Cordell, while acting as notary public, also acted as real estate agent and broker in the purchase and sale of lands, making loans, collecting interest, rents, etc. The plaintiff upon several occasions employed Cordell as such broker or agent to make loans for her, and in the purchase of property, and often consulted him as to such matters, and sometimes acted upon his advice in relation thereto. In several of the loans so made, Cordell produced to plaintiff a note and mortgage prepared and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People of the State of N.Y. v. . PennockNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- McAllister v. C. H. ClementCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Detroit Savings Bank v. ZieglerMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
- People ex rel. Doran v. ButlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by25 opinions
- State v. MoyerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1905
- Heidt v. MinorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Fogleman v. National Surety Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Bank of America v. DowdyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Airlines Reporting Corp. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1995
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.